PHILIPSBURG, Sint Maarten – The screening of justice personnel is a measure designed to promote integrity within organizations. In its recently published report, the Law Enforcement Council concludes that the manner in which (potential) justice personnel are screened or re-screened does not always comply with applicable laws and regulations. Its inspection reveals that although all organizations require at least a Certificate of Good Conduct (VOG) for an appointment in accordance with the law, certain organizations deviate from existing screening procedures. Furthermore, mandatory security screenings are not always conducted (in a timely manner) by a number of organizations. This entails risks.
VOGs and security screenings
Integrity within the justice sector is of great importance. Employees work with sensitive information, and citizens must be able to trust that this is handled carefully and reliably. For this reason, the Council assessed the status of screening and re-screening of personnel within the justice sector. The Council specifically examined the VOG and security screenings.
Although the process surrounding the Certificate of Good Conduct (VOG) is in place, the Council notes that some organizations question the added value of a VOG due to the type of data on which it is currently based. As a result, some organizations are deviating from existing screening procedures and are taking a creative approach to gain more insight into applicants’ backgrounds, for example by making informal inquiries within their own network. This is because the investigation is limited to the procedure of requesting criminal records, even though legislation, regulations, and policies allow for greater flexibility in gathering information, including police records.
While the Council can somewhat understand that organizations devise solutions in practice to obtain more relevant information given the potential risks, the Council believes that this also entails the necessary (integrity) risks for the organization. Even though a number of organizations argue that the absence of the aforementioned data is perceived as unacceptable due to the potential security and integrity risks they face, organizations — just like everyone else— must comply with the law. The Council further notes that the sharing of data within the Kingdom for the issuance of a Certificate of Good Conduct (VOG) is not yet properly regulated by law.
A security screening is mandatory for specific positions. The screening can only be conducted if a position has been officially designated as a so-called position of confidence. However, due to changes in job descriptions and the lack of formal designations, some security screenings cannot currently be carried out. Furthermore, security screenings are not always repeated every five years, even though the law requires this. Here too, the Council highlights the resulting risks.
Urging action
The Council believes that action must be taken as soon as possible to ensure that a number of organizations are in compliance with the law. These are specifically the Coast Guard, the IGD, and the KPSM. This is to ensure that their personnel can undergo a (repeat) security screening, where necessary, and in accordance with the law. In addition, the designation of confidential positions for the Coast Guard has yet to take place.
To achieve the necessary improvements, the Council has made four concrete recommendations to better safeguard the integrity and reliability of justice personnel.
Council website
The full inspection report and all other publications of the Council are available digitally on the website: https://www.raadrh.com/
